A preliminary case study within teacher education was carried out to investigate the value of the theoretical framework. This was done in collaboration with three classes from a middle school, where trainee teachers designed and evaluated DLRs. The unit of study was the learning of school subjects using the DLRs. Data collection methods consisted of student and teacher survey questionnaires. The aim was to measure the students’ and teachers’ perceptions of DLRs. Data from the case study came from three cohorts of participants: Sixty-five students between 14-16 years from three dif- ferent classes, three school teachers, and three teams of trainee teachers as developers of DLRs. From the case study the following implications can be drawn for two major organizing themes:
• Pedagogical usability of DLR design
• Digital literacy and integration of DLRs into classroom 5.1 Pedagogical Usability and DLR Design
Pedagogical usability defines the capability of the DLRs to support the learning of the subject matter. Looking at the different dimensions of pedagogical usability some implications can be drawn.
First, learning activities are important from the point of view of the constructivist learning theory. Both students and teachers pointed out that the degree of learning activities was satisfying, but the tasks provided by the DLRs, were not sufficient to
150 S. Hadjerrouit
really engage the students in constructivist learning as they do not cover the entire knowledge level of a number of students who particularly demonstrated strong motivation and interests in the topics. Advanced learning activities for those students can be achieved with increased integration of motivating and multimedia elements.
Second, teachers were not quite satisfied with the degree of collaboration between students, because they felt that the students did not work together to reach a common goal. The idea of collaboration fits well with the socially situated learning theory, which assumes that learning occurs as learners improve and reflect on their under- standing of the subject matter through discussion with fellow learners [31]. Accord- ingly, DLRs should contribute to increase the learning by collaboration in a higher degree, and allow the students to engage in levels of activity that could not be managed alone, without collaboration with fellow students. Of course, DLRs in them- selves cannot contribute to collaboration, unless teachers perceive the value of collaborative learning.
Third, differentiation is an important criterion for any DLR. It includes different ways of interacting with the DLR while giving special consideration to differentiation between students according to their ability, the different ways students learn, and the different speeds at which students learn. Since it cannot be expected to develop re- sources with a high degree of differentiation within a limited period of time, it implies that the students’ perceptions of differentiation cannot be generalized even if most students pointed out that they were satisfied with the level of differentiation and flexi- bility of the learning material. Nevertheless, designers of DLRs should take into account the students’ preferred learning styles and knowledge levels.
Fourth, the criterion of motivation measures the degree of engagement of the stu- dents with the subject matter when using the DLR. Accordingly, DLRs cannot be considered as highly motivating if they are not adapted to the students’ age, develop- ment, and interests. Student satisfaction with a DLR is, of course, a subjective phenomenon, but one that is important in keeping students engaged with the subject matter. According to Nokelainen [17], motivation can be achieved in many ways, for example through self-regulation, performance or learning goals, as well as extrinsic or intrinsic goal orientation, such as meaningful and interesting study material provided by the DLRs.
Fifth, the criterion of autonomy measures the degree of students’ independence from the teacher when using DLRs. This criterion also measures the degree of inde- pendence from textbooks and other learning resources. Hence, autonomy and inde- pendence can reveal the quality of information provided by the DLR. However, DLRs can contribute to independent learning only if the added value of this technology is taken into consideration and well-perceived by teachers.
Finally, from the viewpoint of pedagogical usability, the DLRs lack a number of features that would make them more flexible, interactive, motivating, and collabora- tive. Even if the research literature [7,9] reveals that DLRs with advanced features are difficult to design, and therefore current DLRs are still limited in their pedagogical usability, one may ask whether the teachers really perceived the potentialities and added value of DLRs. This issue has been addressed by the teachers from different points of view. As a result, teachers still perceive textbooks as important as DLRs in terms of learning outcomes.
5.2 Digital Literacy and Integration of DLRs into Classroom
There have been ongoing efforts for many years to bring ICT into classrooms and to integrate digital literacy into the curriculum. Despite these efforts, there is a little success achieved so far [32]. It is obvious that ICT integration is a complex and de- manding issue both for schools and teachers [33,20,34]. Besides cultural barriers that are caused by the nature of the educational culture and the culture at large as well, which are very difficult to change, there exist pedagogical barriers, as this work clearly demonstrated. Given this background, there are a number of implications that result from the case study for the integration of DLRs into classroom.
First, the curriculum requires that digital literacy be integrated in all subjects, oth- erwise teachers and students would not be able to fulfil the requirements given by the curriculum. The case study reveals that teachers clearly see the importance of DLRs, but they still consider them as supplementary aids in addition to textbooks. This means that DLRs can be used in combination with textbooks inside and outside the classroom, but they should not drastically affect teachers’ ways of instruction, or change their pedagogy. As a result, teachers still perceive DLRs as neutral elements, without added value, that can be used occasionally, in addition to textbooks. Digital literacy however requires more commitment to the potentialities of DLRs.
Second, it thus is expected that DLRs introduce an added value to the learning process in comparison to printed material such as textbooks and material produced by the teacher. The added value of DLRs is in the form of the potentialities this technol- ogy offers, for example interactivity, differentiation, and collaboration, in contrast to textbooks that are more rigid and static in their use. However, DLRs can only be use- ful if the tasks are adapted to the capabilities of the technology. Tasks should not be a direct translation of study materials found in textbooks. They must be interactive and flexible according to students’ individual differences and provide the students with immediate feedback that stimulates the learning motivation.
Third, teachers must be aware of the fact that ICT is not a value-neutral technology [37]. On the contrary, ICT is embedded within pedagogical values that potentially affect teaching and learning processes. It follows that IT can have an effect on how teachers use technology and what students learn from it. Similarly, DLRs cannot be considered as a neutral technology that can be used in classroom without radical changes of the content and ways of teaching and learning. Consequently, the introduc- tion of DLRs can create new pedagogical situations that affect both the students’
learning and the teaching content. However, teachers are not always aware of the non- neutrality of DLRs. If DLRs can create new pedagogical situations, then textbooks can no longer play the same role as before. Clearly, the added value of DLRs cannot be compensated by any textbooks or printed material.
Fourth, there is evidence in the research literature that the integration of ICT is as- sociated with a shift from instructivist or teacher-centred to constructivist or learner- centred methods and teaching philosophies [18]. The case study seems to confirm, to a certain degree, that constructivist learning is important, since teachers reported that interactive learning activities and collaboration should be given more consideration. A shift from instructivism to constructivism requires that the teachers’ role changes from transmitter of knowledge to facilitator of learning.
152 S. Hadjerrouit
Fifth, another crucial factor that may promote or hinder the integration of DLRs is time. Indeed, research reveals that IT can provide positive learning opportunities, but it takes time [35,36]. Accordingly, the overall impression of researchers is that teach- ers’ success in integrating ICT is highly dependent upon the availability of time to think deeply about pedagogical changes. Time plays also an important role for the students in terms of learning effect compared with printed material. However, the fact that DLRs can be used at any time and place does not necessarily mean that it takes less time to learn the subject matter compared to textbooks.
Finally, according to Nokelainen [17], the integration of DLRs into classrooms must be goal-oriented. This means that the objectives of using DLRs must be clear to the students. It seems that a successful integration can be achieved only if the students’ goals, curriculum considerations, learning and teaching material, and the teachers’ goals are closely aligned. Goals can differ according to the learning situa- tion. The goal may be the learning of basic knowledge with clearly specified topics.
The goal may also be the involvement of students in interactive activities. In addition, the goal may be collaboratively discussing important issues of the subject matter, or evaluating the students’ knowledge through graded assessment procedures.